Posts on psychometrics: The Science of Assessment

Big Data - AI Generated Image

Assessments have long been a cornerstone of education, hiring, and psychological research. However, with advancements in artificial intelligence and machine learning, these assessments are evolving faster than ever. Moreover, Big Data is revolutionizing how we measure personality, cognitive ability, and behavioral traits. From adaptive testing to bias detection, it is improving accuracy, efficiency, and fairness in psychological measurement. But with these advancements come challenges—concerns about privacy, bias, and ethical AI implementation.

In this article, we’ll break down how Big Data is transforming in testing, where it’s being applied, and what the future holds.

What is Big Data?

Big Data refers to large-scale, complex datasets that can be analyzed to reveal patterns, trends, and associations. In psychometrics, this means massive amounts of test-taker data—not just scores, but response times, keystroke dynamics, facial expressions, and even biometric data.

Traditional assessments relied on small samples and fixed test items. Today, platforms collect millions of data points in real time, enabling AI-driven insights that were previously impossible. Machine learning algorithms can analyze these rich datasets to detect patterns in behavior, predict future performance, and enhance the precision of assessments.

This shift has led to more precise, adaptive, and fairer assessments—but also raises ethical and practical concerns, such as data privacy, bias in algorithms, and the need for transparency in decision-making.

How Big Data is Transforming Assessment

1. Smarter Assessment

Computerized Adaptive Testing AI Generated Image

Big Data is used to drive the development, administration, and scoring of future-focused assessments. Some examples of this are process data, machine learning personalization, and adaptive testing. By leveraging data-driven decision making inside the assessment, we can make it smarter, faster, and fairer.

Process data refers to the use of data other than answer selection, such as keystroke/mouse dynamics.  An example is a drag-and-drop question where a student has to classify animals into Reptile, Mammal, or Amphibian; instead of just recording the final locations, we can evaluate what they dragged first and where, if they changed their mind, how much time they took to answer the question, etc.  This can provide greater insight into both scoring and feedback.  We can also evaluate the use of tools like rulers or calculators (Liao & Sahin, 2020).  However, it might be of limited use in high-stakes exams where the final answer is what matters.

Machine learning algorithms based on Big Data can improve assessment by personalizing the assessment or even the selection of assessment.  Next-generation learning systems are designed to be adaptive from a very high level, understanding what students know and recommending the next modules, not unlike how your favorite video streaming service learns what shows you like or not and recommends new ones.  This could also be done inside the assessment, transforming it from assessment of learning (AoL) to assessment for learning (AfL).

Big Data can enhance Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT), where test difficulty adjusts in real time based on the test-taker’s responses. Instead of presenting a fixed set of questions, the algorithm selects each new question based on the test-taker’s previous answers, making the assessment more efficient and tailored to individual ability levels.  This approach has been utilized for decades with large-scale exams, with well-known benefits like shorter tests, reduced anxiety, and increased engagement.  The Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT) transitioned to a computer-adaptive format in 1997. Similarly, the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) introduced a computer-adaptive format in 1993 and made it mandatory in 1997. You can read more about adaptive testing in action here.

2. AI-Driven Personality and Behavioral Analysis

Psychometric models like the Big Five and HEXACO are now enhanced by machine learning and natural language processing (NLP).

AI can analyze how people respond, not just what they answer—including text responses, speech patterns, and decision-making behaviors. Companies like HireVue analyze facial expressions and speech cadence to assess job candidates’ traits.

3. Detecting Bias and Improving Fairness

One of the biggest concerns in psychological testing is bias. Traditional tests have been criticized for favoring certain demographics over others.

With Big Data, AI can flag biased questions by analyzing how different groups respond.
Example: If women or minority groups consistently underperform on a test question despite having equal qualifications, the item may be unfair and flagged for review.

This helps ensure that assessments are more equitable and inclusive.

4. Predicting Job Performance and Talent Retention

Companies are increasingly using psychometric Big Data to predict:

  • Which candidates will succeed in a role
  • Who is at risk of burnout
  • How leadership potential can be identified early

Example: Google uses Big Data psychometric analysis to refine its hiring process, ensuring long-term employee success and cultural fit. You can read a more in-depth look at their hiring process here.

5. Real-Time Fraud Detection in Assessments

Just like SIFT detects test fraud, Big Data helps identify cheating in online exams. AI can analyze eye movement, response times, and typing behavior to detect suspicious activity.  The models to do so are trained on large data sets; for example, a proctoring provider might have millions of past exam data, with stored videos as well as human-confirmed flags of if they were cheating or not. Universities and companies now use AI-powered proctoring tools to prevent cheating in high-stakes tests.

The Challenges of Big Data in Assessment

The integration of Big Data into psychometrics offers significant advancements but also presents several challenges that must be carefully managed:

1. Privacy and Data Security Risks

Challenges_of_Big_Data_in_Assessment AI Generated Image

Collecting extensive psychological data introduces serious ethical concerns. Regulations like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States mandate strict data protection protocols to safeguard individuals’ personal information. Ensuring compliance with these laws is essential to protect test-takers’ confidentiality and maintain public trust.

2. Algorithmic Bias in AI

AI models trained on historical data can inadvertently perpetuate existing biases if not properly managed. A notable example is Amazon’s hiring algorithm, which was discontinued after it demonstrated bias against female candidates. This incident underscores the importance of developing strategies to identify and mitigate bias in AI-driven assessments to ensure fairness and equity. You can read more about the incident here.

3. Necessity of Human Oversight

While AI-driven assessments can provide valuable insights, human oversight remains crucial. Misinterpretation or overreliance on automated results can lead to incorrect hiring decisions, misdiagnoses, or unethical outcomes. Professionals in psychology and human resources play a vital role in interpreting data within the appropriate context, ensuring that decisions are informed by both technological tools and human judgment.

Addressing these challenges requires a balanced approach that leverages the benefits of Big Data and AI while implementing safeguards to protect individual rights and uphold ethical standards.

The Future of Big Data in Psychometrics

The integration of Big Data into psychometrics is paving the way for innovative advancements that promise to enhance the precision, security, and ethical standards of assessments. Here are some emerging trends:

1. Wearable Biometric Assessments

Big Data in Psychometrics - AI Generated Image

The incorporation of data from wearable devices, such as heart rate monitors and electroencephalogram (EEG) sensors, into cognitive tests is on the rise. These devices provide real-time physiological data that can offer deeper insights into a test-taker’s cognitive and emotional states, potentially leading to more comprehensive assessments. For instance, in healthcare, wearable technology has been utilized for continuous monitoring and personalized care, highlighting its potential application in psychometric evaluations.

2. More Transparent AI Models

The demand for explainable AI in assessments is growing. Developing AI models that provide clear, understandable explanations for their decisions is crucial to ensure ethical use and to mitigate biases. This transparency is essential for building trust in AI-driven assessments and for adhering to ethical standards in testing. You can learn about that here.

3. Blockchain for Secure Testing

Blockchain technology is being explored for enhancing the security and integrity of assessments. Its decentralized ledger system can be used for secure credential verification, ensuring that test results are tamper-proof and verifiable. This approach can uphold the integrity of assessments and protect against fraudulent activities.

4. Integration of Assessment with Learning

The future of testing includes a closer integration of assessment and learning processes. Adaptive learning platforms that utilize Big Data can provide personalized learning experiences, adjusting content and assessments in real-time to meet individual learner needs. This approach not only enhances learning outcomes but also provides continuous assessment data that can inform educational strategies.

5. Greater Insight into Open-Response Items

Advancements in natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning are enabling more sophisticated analysis of open-response items in assessments. These technologies can evaluate the content, structure, and sentiment of written responses, providing deeper insights into test-takers’ understanding, reasoning, and communication skills. This development allows for a more nuanced evaluation of competencies that are difficult to measure with traditional multiple-choice questions.

As Big Data continues to shape the field of psychometrics, it is imperative to balance innovation with ethical responsibility. Ensuring data privacy, mitigating biases, and maintaining transparency are crucial considerations as we advance toward more sophisticated and personalized assessment methodologies.

Final Thoughts: The Future is Here, but Caution is Key

Big Data is revolutionizing assessment, making tests faster, more precise, and highly adaptive. AI-driven testing can unlock deeper insights into human cognition and behavior, transforming everything from education to hiring. However, these advancements come with profound ethical dilemmas—issues of privacy, bias, and opaque AI decision-making must be addressed to ensure responsible implementation.

To move forward, assessment professionals must embrace AI’s potential while demanding fairness, transparency, and rigorous data governance. The future of testing is not just about innovation but about striking the right balance between technology and ethical responsibility. As we harness AI to enhance assessments, we must remain vigilant in protecting individuals’ rights and ensuring that data-driven insights serve to empower rather than exclude.

Generalized-partial-credit-model

What is a Rubric?

A rubric is a set of rules for converting unstructured responses on assessments—such as essays—into structured data that can be analyzed psychometrically. It helps educators evaluate qualitative work consistently and fairly.

Why Do We Need Rubrics?

Measurement is a quantitative endeavor. In psychometrics, we aim to measure knowledge, achievement, aptitude, or skills. Rubrics help convert qualitative data (like essays) into quantitative scores. While qualitative feedback remains valuable for learning, quantitative data is crucial for assessments.

For example, a teacher might score an essay using a rubric (0 to 4 points) but also provide personalized feedback to guide student improvement.

How Many Rubrics Do I Need?

The number of rubrics you need depends on what you’re assessing:

  • Mathematics: Often, a single rubric suffices because answers are either right or wrong.
  • Writing: More complex. You might assess multiple skills like grammar, argument structure, and spelling, each with its own rubric.

Examples of Rubrics

Spelling Rubric for an Essay

Points Description
0 Essay contains 5 or more spelling mistakes
1 Essay contains 1 to 4 spelling mistakes
2 Essay does not contain any spelling mistakes

 

Argument Rubric for an Essay

Prompt: “Your school is considering eliminating organized sports. Write an essay for the School Board with three reasons to keep sports, supported by explanations.”

Points Description
0 Student does not include any reasons with explanation (includes providing 3 reasons but no explanations)
1 Student provides 1 reason with a clear explanation
2 Student provides 2 reasons with clear explanations
3 Student provides 3 reasons with clear explanations

 

Answer Rubric for Math

Points Description
0 Student provides no response or a response that does not indicate understanding of the problem.
1 Student provides a response that indicates understanding of the problem, but does not arrive at correct answer OR provides the correct answer but no supporting work.
2 Student provides a response with the correct answer and supporting work that explains the process.

 

How Do I Score Tests with a Rubric?

Traditionally, rubric scores are added to the total score. This method aligns with classical test theory, using statistics like coefficient alpha (reliability) and Pearson correlation (discrimination).

However, item response theory (IRT) offers a more advanced approach. Techniques like the generalized partial credit model analyze rubric data deeply, enhancing score accuracy. (Muraki, 1992; resources on that here and here).

Example: In an essay scored 0-4 points:

  • An average student (Theta = 0) likely scores 2 points.
  • A higher-performing student (Theta = 1) likely scores 3 points.

An example of this is below.  Imagine that you have an essay which is scored 0-4 points.  This graph shows the probability of earning each point level, as a function of total score (Theta).  Someone who is average (Theta=0.0) is likely to get 2 points, the yellow line.  Someone at Theta=1.0 is likely to get 3 points.  Note that the middle curves are always bell-shaped while the ones on the end go up to an upper asymptote of 1.0.  That is, the smarter the student, the more likely they are to get 4 out of 4 points, but the probability of that can never go above 100%, obviously.

Generalized-partial-credit-model

How Can I Efficiently Implement a Scoring Rubric?

Efficiency improves with online assessment platforms that support rubrics. Look for platforms with:

  • Integrated psychometrics
  • Multiple rubrics per item
  • Multi-rater support
  • Anonymity features

These tools streamline grading, improve consistency, and save time.

Online marking essays

 

What About Automated Essay Scoring?

Automated essay scoring (AES) uses machine learning models trained on human-scored data. While AES isn’t flawless, it can significantly reduce grading time when combined with human oversight.  Of course, you can also ask LLMs to grade essays for you, but this lacks accuracy and validity – that is, you don’t have actual evidence like if you scored 10,000 essays by humans and then analyzed the data.

Final Thoughts

Rubrics are essential tools for educators, offering structured, fair, and consistent ways to assess complex student work. Whether you’re grading essays, math problems, or projects, implementing clear rubrics improves both assessment quality and student learning outcomes.

Ready to improve your assessments? Request a demo of our online platform with an integrated essay marking module!

 

automated test assembly

Time limits are an essential parameter to just about every type of assessment.  A time limit is the length of time given to individuals to complete their assessment or a defined portion of it. Managing test timing effectively ensures fairness, accuracy, and a pleasant experience for all test-takers – and is therefore a component of validity, which means we need to thoughtfully research and establish the time limits. In this blog post, we will explore the concept of test timing, how time limits are determined, and how accommodations are provided for those who need extra time.

Power vs Speeded vs Timed

When it comes to the role of time, there are three types of assessment. This article focuses on timed tests.  More on speeded vs power tests can be found in this article.

Power: This test is untimed, meaning that the examinee has as much time as they want to show just how much they can do and how far they can go.  The goal of the test is to find the maximum performance level of the examinee.  For example, we might give them a math test with items that are years ahead of what they have learned, but bright students might be able to figure them out if given enough time.

Speeded: A speeded test is one where the time limit is set low enough that it affects performance, and the goal of the test is more to evaluate the velocity of the examinee.  For example, we might provide you with a list of 100 simple math problems and see how many you can finish in 30 seconds.  Or, provide you with a list of 100 words to proofread in 30 seconds.  In these cases, getting the correct answers is still the score, but it is driven by the time limit.  There are, of course, assessments where the time is the score; many of us had to run a mile when we were in school, and of course there is only one “item” on the test, the score is entirely the time taken to finish.

Timed: A timed test is one where there is a time limit, but it is intentionally designed to not impact the majority of examinees, and is therefore more for practical purposes.  Most assessments fall into this category.  There might be 100 items with a 2-hour time limit, and most examinees finish within 1.5 hours.  The time limit exists so that the student does not sit there all day, but it has virtually no impact on their performance.  In some cases, the only students who hit the time limit are the high achievers who are so intent on getting 100% that they take every minute possible to keep checking their work!

Factors Considered When Determining Time Limits

Several factors are considered when deciding on time limits for assessments. One important factor to consider is the complexity of the content being assessed. As an example, a math or science test requiring intricate problem-solving will require more time to complete than a verbal reasoning or test of general cognitive ability.

Unsurprisingly, the time load of the questions is important as well.  If there are reading passages, videos, complex images like X-rays, or other assets which require a lot of time to digest before even starting the question, then this obviously needs to be taken into account.

The intended purpose of the exam also influences time limits. For high-stakes exams, such as licensing or certification tests, the goal is to ensure the candidate demonstrates a high level of knowledge, and we need very high reliability and validity for the test.  This usually means that the test has more questions, and we want to provide an opportunity for the candidate to show what they know.  On the other hand, a quick screening test to see if a kid has learned the most recent unit of 4th grade math has much lower stakes, so a shorter time limit does not affect the purpose, and in this case actually aligns with the goal of “quick.”  Screening tests for pre-employment purposes, or medical surveys, also align with this.

Finally, test security is another consideration.  Some people take tests with the goal of stealing the intellectual property.  If we give them extra time to sit there and memorize the items so they can put them on illegal websites, that does no good to anyone.

Determining Time Limits for Linear Tests

Historical data and statistical modeling are often used to estimate the optimal time for test-takers. Test developers rely on empirical evidence and past performance to predict how long an average test-taker might need to finish the test, and to adjust the time limit accordingly.

You might pilot a test and determine that the questions take 1 minute on average, and if the test is 100 items, then 120 minutes (2 hours) makes a plausible time limit.  More complex modeling might also be useful, such as this article discussing lognormal distributions.test time limits metadata

Determining Time Limits for Adaptive Tests

Unlike traditional fixed-form assessments, in which every test-taker answers the same questions, Computerized Adaptive Testing (CAT) adjusts the test in real time based on how an individual performs. While some adaptive tests provide the same number of items to each examinee, the difficulty will vary widely.  Moreover, some tests will vary in the number of items used.  For example, the NCLEX (nursing licensure exam) will range from 85 to 150 items.

The US Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery is adaptive, and configured the linear timing approach to this situation.  Suppose again that items take 1 minute on average.  If we know that a test is an average of 100 items with a standard deviation of 10, then 98% of examinees will take less than 120 items, that then means 98% of examinees will finish under 120 minutes with no speededness.  Such research questions are discussed in technical reports like this one, and also the landmark book Computerized adaptive testing: From inquiry to operation. American Psychological Association.

Time Limit Extensions: Accommodations for Test-Takers

In a diverse world in which test-takers have varying needs, it is essential that accommodations are available for those who may require additional time to complete a test. Test-takers with learning disabilities, attention disorders, or physical impairments may find standard time limits difficult to manage, and they may benefit from time limit extensions.

For example, individuals with dyslexia or ADHD might take longer to process information or may require breaks to stay focused. Providing extra time, usually in the form of a varied or fixed additional number of minutes can help level the playing field for these candidates. Examinees with visual impairments might need special software or even a human to read the questions to them, requiring extra time.

To ensure fairness, accommodations are typically offered based on documentation of the individual’s specific needs. This can include medical assessments, educational records, or reports from licensed professionals that substantiate the need for extra time. The multiplier for extra time can differ from examinee to examinee, as seen below. These accommodations are not intended to provide unfair advantages, but to ensure every test-taker may demonstrate their knowledge.

test time accomodations

Types of Time Limits

We’ve focused this discussion on time limits for a test, but there are actually several levels of time limits that can be applied.

Item: For some tests, you might set a hard limit of, say, 30 seconds per item.  This is usually only when it is relevant to the measurement, such as a working memory test.

Section: Longer tests are broken into sections, so the time limit might be more relevant at this level.  You might have an hour for section 1, a 10 minute break, and then an hour for section 2.  Setting an overall time limit of 2:10 then seems unnecessary.

Test: As discussed above, this is what we typically think of, with a test that has one section and a time limit overall.

Session: Some assessments have multiple tests, which is known as a battery.  While the individual tests might each have time limits, there might also be a session maximum.

Functionality regarding test limits also needs to mesh with other functionality regarding test security, such as re-entry.  For example, you can see that our Assess.ai platform has an option to allow an examinee to leave, but continue the clock ticking while they are out, with automatic submission when the time limit is complete.

Session Security time limits

Conclusion

Time limits are essential aspects in assessment, having a direct effect on the validity of scores as well as the experience of examinees. Determining appropriate time limits requires careful consideration of multiple factors, including the complexity of the content, the number of questions, and test security concerns. At the same time, it is essential to provide accommodations for test-takers who require additional time to ensure that individuals can perform to the best of their abilities, regardless of any physical or cognitive challenges. By including these considerations, testing organizations can ensure that their assessments are both fair and accessible, promoting a more inclusive and equal testing experience for all.

SIFT test security data forensics

Introduction

Test fraud is an extremely common occurrence.  We’ve all seen articles about examinee cheating.  However, there are very few defensible tools to help detect it.  I once saw a webinar from an online testing provider that proudly touted their reports on test security… but it turned out that all they provided was a simple export of student answers that you could subjectively read and form conjectures.

The goal of SIFT is to provide a tool that implements real statistical indices from scientific research on statistical detection of test fraud. It’s user-friendly enough to be used by someone without a PhD in psychometrics or experience in data forensics. SIFT provides more collusion indices and analysis than any other software, making it the industry standard from the day of its release. The science behind SIFT is also implemented in our world-class online testing platform, FastTest which supports computerized adaptive testing known to increase test security.

Interested?  Download a free trial version of SIFT!

What is Test Fraud?

As long as tests have been around, people have been trying to cheat them. Anytime there’s a system with stakes or incentives involved, people will try to game it. The root culprit is the system itself, not the test. Blaming the test is just shooting the messenger.

In most cases, the system serves a useful purpose. K-12 assessments provide information on curriculum and teachers, certification tests identify qualified professionals, and so on. To preserve the system’s integrity, we must minimize test fraud.

When it comes to test fraud, the old cliché is true: an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. While I recommend implementing preventative measures to deter fraud, some cases will always occur. SIFT is designed to help find those cases. Additionally, the knowledge that such analysis is being conducted can deter some examinees.

How can SIFT help me with statistical detection of test fraud?

Like other psychometric software, SIFT does not interpret results for you. For example, software for item analysis like Iteman  and  Xcalibre

doesn’t tell you which items to retire or how to revise them—they provide output for practitioners to analyze. SIFT offers a wide range of outputs to help identify:

  • Copying
  • Proctor assistance
  • Suspect test centers
  • Brain dump usage
  • Low examinee motivation

YOU decide what’s important for detecting test fraud and look for relevant evidence. More details are provided in the manual, but here’s a glimpse.

SIFT Test Security Data Forensics

SIFT calculates various indices to evaluate potential fraud:

  • Collusion Indices: SIFT calculates these for each student pair, summarizing the number of flags.

SIFT test security data forensics

First, there are a number of indices you can evaluate, as you see above.  SIFT  will calculate those collusion indices for each pair of students, and summarize the number of flags.

  • Brain Dump Detection: Compare examinee responses with known brain dump content, especially content intentionally seeded by the organization.

sift collusion index analysis

A certification organization could use  SIFT  to look for evidence of brain dump makers and takers by evaluating similarity between examinee response vectors and answers from a brain dump site – especially if those were intentionally seeded by the organization!  We also might want to find adjacent examinees or examinees in the same location that group together in the collusion index output.  Unfortunately, these indices can differ substantially in their conclusions.

  • Adjacent Examinee Analysis: Identify students in the same location with suspiciously similar responses.

sift group analysis

Additionally, we can roll up many of these statistics to the group level.  Below is an example that provides a portion of  SIFT  output regarding teachers.  Note that Gutierrez has suspiciously high scores but without spending much more time.  Cheating?  Possibly.  On the other hand, that is the smallest N, so perhaps the teacher just had a group of accelerated students.  Worthington, on the other hand, also had high scores but had notably shorter times – perhaps the teacher was helping?

  • Response Time Data: Evaluate time spent on questions to detect irregularities.

sift time analysis

Finally, you might want to evaluate time data.  SIFT  provides this as well.

Group-Level Analysis

SIFT rolls up statistics to the group level. For example, one teacher might have suspiciously high scores without much time spent per question. Is it cheating? Possibly. But perhaps the teacher had a group of accelerated students. Another teacher may show high scores with notably shorter times—perhaps due to unauthorized assistance.

The Story of SIFT

I started developing SIFT in 2012. ASC previously sold a program called Scrutiny!, but we stopped due to compatibility issues with newer Windows versions. Despite that, we kept receiving inquiries.

Determined to create a better tool, I set out to develop SIFT. I aimed to include the analysis from Scrutiny! (the Bellezza & Bellezza index) and much more. After years of business hurdles and countless hours, SIFT was released in July 2016.

Version 1.0 of SIFT includes:

  • 10 Collusion Indices (5 probabilistic, 5 descriptive)
  • Response Time Analysis
  • Group-Level Analysis
  • Additional tools for detecting test fraud

While not exhaustive of all literature analyses, SIFT surpasses other options for practitioners.

Suggestions? We’d love to hear from you!

job-task-analysis

KSAOs (Knowledge, Skills, Abilities, and Other Characteristics) is an approach to defining the human attributes necessary for success on a job.  It is an essential aspect of human resources and organizational development field, impacting critical business processes from recruitment to selection to compensation.  This post provides an introduction to KSAOs and then discusses how they impact the human assessments in the workplace, such as pre-employment screening or certification/licensure exams.

Need help developing an assessment based on sound psychometrics such as job analysis and KSAOs?  Or just need a software platform to make it easier for you to do so?  Get in touch!

What is a KSAO? Knowledge, Skills, Abilities, and Other Characteristics

KSAO is an acronym that represents four essential components:hr-interview-pre-employment

Knowledge refers to the understanding or awareness of concepts, facts, and information required to perform a job. This can include both formal education and practical experience. For example, a software developer needs knowledge of programming languages like Python or Java.

Skills are the learned proficiency or expertise in specific tasks. Skills are often technical in nature and can be developed through practice. For instance, an accountant needs strong skills in financial analysis or spreadsheet management.

Abilities are the natural or developed traits that determine how well someone can perform certain tasks. This includes cognitive abilities such as problem-solving or physical abilities like manual dexterity. A surgeon, for example, must have the ability to remain calm under pressure and possess fine motor skills to perform delicate operations.

Other characteristics refer to personal attributes or traits that may influence job performance but don’t necessarily fall into the above categories. These could include things like personality traits, work ethics, or attitudes. For instance, a customer service representative should have a positive attitude and excellent communication skills.

Examples of KSAOs

Here are some examples of KSAOs in various roles:

Registered Nurse:

  • Knowledge: Medical terminology, patient care protocols, pharmacology.
  • Skills: Administering injections, operating medical equipment, record-keeping.
  • Abilities: Emotional resilience, critical thinking, physical stamina.
  • Other characteristics: Compassion, teamwork, attention to detail.

Marketing Manager:

  • Knowledge: Market research, digital marketing trends, consumer behavior.
  • Skills: Data analysis, content creation, campaign management.
  • Abilities: Strategic thinking, multitasking, creative problem-solving.
  • Other characteristics: Leadership, adaptability, communication skills.

Software Engineer:

  • Knowledge: Programming languages, software development methodologies.
  • Skills: Debugging code, designing algorithms, testing software.
  • Abilities: Logical reasoning, attention to detail, time management.
  • Other characteristics: Innovation, teamwork, problem-solving attitude.

Why Are KSAOs Important in Human Resources, Recruitment, and Selection?

KSAOs are integral in various parts of the HR cycle, primarily by providing quality information about jobs to decision-makers.

  1. Drive Recruitment: KSAOs provide a clear framework for matching candidates with job roles. By assessing whether a candidate has the required knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics, employers can avoid mismatches that could result in poor performance or turnover.
  2. Clear Job Expectations: When a job is defined by its KSAOs, both employers and employees have a clearer understanding of what is expected in terms of performance. This reduces confusion and ensures that candidates understand the responsibilities and qualifications required.
  3. Improved Hiring Decisions: Analyzing KSAOs allows employers to focus on evaluating specific traits and capabilities.  This helps to ensure that they choose individuals who are best equipped to handle the job. It helps streamline the hiring process and avoid subjective decisions based solely on resumes or interviews by focusing on reliable, objective assessments.
  4. Enhanced Training and Development: Once KSAOs are clearly defined, employers can identify skill gaps and focus their training efforts on developing specific areas. This targeted approach makes employee development more efficient. It can also improve retention.
  5. Legal Compliance and Fairness: By focusing on specific job-related criteria like KSAOs, employers are less likely to make hiring decisions based on irrelevant factors, such as personal biases. This helps maintain legal compliance and promotes fairness in hiring practices.
  6. Informs Compensation Structures: Comparing KSAOs between different job families within the hierarchy of an organization can help provide reasoning and documentation behind compensation plans.

So… how does this pertain to assessment?

Workforce-related assessment such as Certification/Licensure or Pre-Employment tests have to be supported by validity, which is evidence and documentation that the tests measure and predict what we want them to. This then begs the question, what do we want them to measure and predict? The KSAOs!test dev cycle

For example, if you are developing a certification test for widgetmakers, you have to make sure it covers the right content, so that if (when!) the test is challenged or submitted for accreditation, you have evidence that it does. You can’t just go down to your basement and write 100 questions willy-nilly then put them up on some cheap online exam platform. Instead, you need to do a job analysis.

Job analysis is the process of systematically studying a job to determine the duties, responsibilities, required skills, and qualifications. This is the foundation upon which KSAOs are defined. By analyzing the job thoroughly, employers can define the exact KSAOs that are necessary for someone to perform well in that position.

There are two general approaches: focus groups and surveys. For focus groups, you might get 8 expert widgetmakers in a room for a day to discuss and agree on the KSAOs or tasks done on the job, then define weights for each on the exam. For the survey, you make a list of KSAOs or tasks and then send it out to hundreds of widgetmakers, asking them to rate how important or frequent each are to successful performance.

The results of this are a very well-defined list of KSAOs and tasks that are critical for the job, with relative weighting. This can provide input into important business processes like those discussed above (interview questions, job postings, recruitment), but for higher-stakes exams, you use this information to make formal exam blueprints. This will ensure that professionals who earn the certification have demonstrated a certain level of expertise on the KSAOs. The blueprints are also useful for pre-employment assessments to screen applicants, highlighting those which are more qualified than others.

Conclusion: The Value of KSAOs

Incorporating KSAOs as the foundation of your employee hiring, development, and assessment processes can provide invaluable insight, increase validity, and have a positive impact to the company bottom line. By understanding and evaluating these components, organizations can make informed decisions that contribute to long-term success.

Whether you’re a hiring manager or an HR professional, embracing KSAO-based assessments can enhance your ability to cultivate a strong, capable workforce. Contact us if you wish to talk with an expert about developing exams which meet international psychometric standards.  Additionally, our powerful yet easy-to-use online platform is ideal to develop and deliver your assessments.

 

computerized adaptive testing

Computerized adaptive testing is an AI-based approach to assessment where the test is personalized based on your performance as you take the test, making the test shorter, more accurate, more secure, more engaging, and fairer.  If you do well, the items get more difficult, and if you do poorly, the items get easier.  If an accurate score is reached, the test stops early.  By tailoring question difficulty to each test-taker’s performance, CAT ensures an efficient and secure testing process.  The AI algorithms are almost always based on Item Response Theory (IRT), an application of machine learning to assessment, but can be based on other models as well. 

 

Prefer to learn by doing?  Request a free account in FastTest, our powerful adaptive testing platform.

Free FastTest Account

What is computerized adaptive testing?

Computerized adaptive testing (CAT), sometimes called computer-adaptive testing, adaptive assessment, or adaptive testing, is an algorithm that personalizes how an assessment is delivered to each examinee.  It is coded into a software platform, using the machine-learning approach of IRT to select items and score examinees.  The algorithm proceeds in a loop until the test is complete.  This makes the test smarter, shorter, fairer, and more precise.

computerized Adaptive testing options

The steps in the diagram above are adapted from Kingsbury and Weiss (1984). based on these components.

Components of a CAT

  1. Item bank calibrated with IRT
  2. Starting point (theta level before someone answers an item)
  3. Item selection algorithm (usually maximum Fisher information)
  4. Scoring method (e.g., maximum likelihood)
  5. Termination criterion (stop the test at 50 items, or when standard error is less than 0.30?  Both?)

How the components work

For starters, you need an item bank that has been calibrated with a relevant psychometric or machine learning model.  That is, you can’t just write a few items and subjectively rank them as Easy, Medium, or Hard difficulty.  That’s an easy way to get sued.  Instead, you need to write a large number of items (rule of thumb is 3x your intended test length) and then pilot them on a representative sample of examinees.  The sample must be large enough to support the psychometric model you choose, and can range from 100 to 1000.  You then need to perform simulation research – more on that later.

computerized adaptive testing

Once you have an item bank ready, here is how the computerized adaptive testing algorithm works for a student that sits down to take the test, with options for how to do so.

  1. Starting point: there are three option to select the starting score, which psychometricians call theta
    • Everyone gets the same value, like 0.0 (average, in the case of non-Rasch models)
    • Randomized within a range, to help test security and item exposure
    • Predicted value, perhaps from external data, or from a previous exam
  2. Select item
    • Find the item in the bank that has the highest information value
    • Often, you need to balance this with practical constraints such as Item Exposure or Content Balancing
  3. Score the examinee
    • Usually IRT, maximum likelihood or Bayes modal
  4. Evaluate termination criterion: using a predefined rule supported by your simulation research
    • Is a certain level of precision reached, such as a standard error of measurement <0.30?
    • Are there no good items left in the bank?
    • Has a time limit been reached?
    • Has a Max Items limit been reached?

The algorithm works by looping through 2-3-4 until the termination criterion is satisfied.

How does the test adapt? By Difficulty or Quantity?

CATs operate by adapting both the difficulty and quantity of items seen by each examinee.

Difficulty
Most characterizations of computerized adaptive testing focus on how item difficulty is matched to examinee ability. High-ability examinees receive more difficult items, while low ability examinees receive easier items, which has important benefits to the student and the organization. An adaptive test typically begins by delivering an item of medium difficulty; if you get it correct, you get a tougher item, and if you get it incorrect, you get an easier item.  This pattern continues.

Quantity: Fixed-Length vs. Variable-Length
A less publicized facet of adaptation is the number of items. Adaptive tests can be designed to stop when certain psychometric criteria are reached, such as a specific level of score precision. Some examinees finish very quickly with few items, so that adaptive tests are typically about half as many questions as a regular test, with at least as much accuracy. Since some examinees have longer tests, these adaptive tests are referred to as variable-length. Obviously, this makes for a massive benefit: cutting testing time in half, on average, can substantially decrease testing costs.

Some adaptive tests use a fixed length, and only adapt item difficulty. This is merely for public relations issues, namely the inconvenience of dealing with examinees who feel they were unfairly treated by the CAT, even though it is arguably more fair and valid than conventional tests.  In general, it is best practice to meld the two: allow test length to be shorter or longer, but put caps on either end that prevent inadvertently too-short tests or tests that could potentially go on to 400 items.  For example, the NCLEX has a minimum length exam of 75 items and the maximum length exam of 145 items.

 

Example of the computerized adaptive testing algorithm

Let’s walk through an oversimplified example.  Here, we have an item bank with 5 questions.  We will start with an item of average difficulty, and answer as would a student of below-average difficulty.

Below are the item information functions for five items in a bank.  Let’s suppose the starting theta is 0.0.  

item information functions

 

  1. We find the first item to deliver.  Which item has the highest information at 0.0?  It is Item 4.
  2. Suppose the student answers incorrectly.
  3. We run the IRT scoring algorithm, and suppose the score is -2.0.  
  4. Check the termination criterion; we certainly aren’t done yet, after 1 item.
  5. Find the next item.  Which has the highest information at -2.0?  Item 2.
  6. Suppose the student answers correctly.
  7. We run the IRT scoring algorithm, and suppose the score is -0.8.  
  8. Evaluate termination criterion; not done yet.
  9. Find the next item.  Item 2 is the highest at -0.8 but we already used it.  Item 4 is next best, but we already used it.  So the next best is Item 1.
  10. Item 1 is very easy, so the student gets it correct.
  11. New score is -0.2.
  12. Best remaining item at -0.2 is Item 3.
  13. Suppose the student gets it incorrect.
  14. New score is perhaps -0.4.
  15. Evaluate termination criterion.  Suppose that the test has a max of 3 items, an extremely simple criterion.  We have met it.  The test is now done and automatically submitted.

 

Advantages of computerized adaptive testing

By making the test more intelligent, adaptive testing provides a wide range of benefits.  Some of the well-known advantages of adaptive testing, recognized by scholarly psychometric research, are listed below.  
 

Shorter tests

Research has found that adaptive tests produce anywhere from a 50% to 90% reduction in test length.  This is no surprise.  Suppose you have a pool of 100 items.  A top student is practically guaranteed to get the easiest 70 correct; only the hardest 30 will make them think.  Vice versa for a low student.  Middle-ability students do no need the super-hard or the super-easy items.

Why does this matter?  Primarily, it can greatly reduce costs.  Suppose you are delivering 100,000 exams per year in testing centers, and you are paying $30/hour.  If you can cut your exam from 2 hours to 1 hour, you just saved $3,000,000.  Yes, there will be increased costs from the development and maintenance of computer adaptive tests, but you will likely save money in the end.

For the K12 assessment, you aren’t paying for seat time, but there is the opportunity cost of lost instruction time.  If students are taking formative assessments 3 times per year to check on progress, and you can reduce each by 20 minutes, that is 1 hour; if there are 500,000 students in your State, then you just saved 500,000 hours of learning.

More precise scores

CAT will make tests more accurate, in general.  It does this by designing the algorithms specifically around how to get more accurate scores without wasting examinee time.

More control of score precision (accuracy)

CAT ensures that all students will have the same accuracy, making the test much fairer.  Traditional tests measure the middle students well but not the top or bottom students.  Is it better than A) students see the same items but can have drastically different accuracy of scores, or B) have equivalent accuracy of scores, but see different items?

Better test security

Since all students are essentially getting an assessment that is tailored to them, there is better test security than everyone seeing the same 100 items.  Item exposure is greatly reduced; note, however, that this introduces its own challenges, and adaptive assessment algorithms have considerations of their own item exposure.

A better experience for examinees, with reduced fatigue

Computer adaptive tests will tend to be less frustrating for examinees on all ranges of ability.  Moreover, by implementing variable-length stopping rules (e.g., once we know you are a top student, we don’t give you the 70 easy items), reduces fatigue.

Increased examinee motivation

Since examinees only see items relevant to them, this provides an appropriate challenge.  Low-ability examinees will feel more comfortable and get many more items correct than with a linear test.  High-ability students will get the difficult items that make them think.

Frequent retesting is possible

The whole “unique form” idea applies to the same student taking the same exam twice.  Suppose you take the test in September, at the beginning of a school year, and take the same one again in November to check your learning.  You’ve likely learned quite a bit and are higher on the ability range; you’ll get more difficult items, and therefore a new test.  If it was a linear test, you might see the same exact test.

This is a major reason that CAT plays a huge role in formative testing for K-12 education, delivered several times per year to millions of students in the US alone.

Individual pacing of tests

Examinees can move at their own speed.  Some might move quickly and be done in only 30 items.  Others might waver, also seeing 30 items but taking more time.  Still, others might see 60 items.  The algorithms can be designed to maximize the process.

Advantages of computerized testing in general

Of course, the advantages of using a computer to deliver a test are also relevant.  Here are a few
  • Immediate score reporting
  • On-demand testing can reduce printing, scheduling, and other paper-based concerns
  • Storing results in a database immediately makes data management easier
  • Computerized testing facilitates the use of multimedia in items
  • You can immediately run psychometric reports
  • Timelines are reduced with an integrated item banking system

 

How to develop an adaptive assessment that is valid and defensible

CATs are the future of assessment. They operate by adapting both the difficulty and number of items to each individual examinee. The development of an adaptive test is no small feat, and requires five steps integrating the expertise of test content developers, software engineers, and psychometricians.

The development of a quality adaptive test is complex and requires experienced psychometricians in both item response theory (IRT) calibration and CAT simulation research. FastTest can provide you the psychometrician and software; if you provide test items and pilot data, we can help you quickly publish an adaptive version of your test.

   Step 1: Feasibility, applicability, and planning studies. First, extensive monte carlo simulation research must occur, and the results formulated as business cases, to evaluate whether adaptive testing is feasible, applicable, or even possible.

   Step 2: Develop item bank. An item bank must be developed to meet the specifications recommended by Step 1.

   Step 3: Pretest and calibrate item bank. Items must be pilot tested on 200-1000 examinees (depends on IRT model) and analyzed by a Ph.D. psychometrician.

   Step 4: Determine specifications for final CAT. Data from Step 3 is analyzed to evaluate CAT specifications and determine most efficient algorithms using CAT simulation software such as CATSim.

   Step 5: Publish live CAT. The adaptive test is published in a testing engine capable of fully adaptive tests based on IRT.  There are not very many of them out in the market.  Sign up for a free account in our platform FastTest and try for yourself!

Want to learn more about our one-of-a-kind model? Click here to read the seminal article by our two co-founders.  More adaptive testing research is available here.

Minimum requirements for computerized adaptive testing

Here are some minimum requirements to evaluate if you are considering a move to the CAT approach.

  • A large item bank piloted so that each item has at least 100 valid responses (Rasch model) or 500 (3PL model)
  • 500 examinees per year
  • Specialized IRT calibration and CAT simulation software like  Xcalibre  and  CATsim.
  • Staff with a Ph.D. in psychometrics or an equivalent level of experience. Or, leverage our internationally recognized expertise in the field.
  • Items (questions) that can be scored objectively correct/incorrect in real-time
  • An item banking system and CAT delivery platform
  • Financial resources: Because it is so complex, the development of a CAT will cost at least $10,000 (USD) — but if you are testing large volumes of examinees, it will be a significantly positive investment. If you pay $20/hour for proctoring seats and cut a test from 2 hours to 1 hour for just 1,000 examinees… that’s a $20,000 savings.  If you are doing 200,000 exams?  That is $4,000,000 in seat time that is saved.

Adaptive testing: Resources for further reading

Visit the links below to learn more about adaptive assessment.  

  • We first recommend that you first read this landmark article by our co-founders.
  • Read this article on producing better measurements with CAT from Prof. David J. Weiss.
  • International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing: www.iacat.org
  • Here is the link to the webinar on the history of CAT, by the godfather of CAT, Prof. David J. Weiss.

Examples of CAT

Many large-scale assessments utilize adaptive technology.  The GRE (Graduate Record Examination) is a prime example of an adaptive test. So is the NCLEX (nursing exam in the USA), GMAT (business school admissions), Paramedic/EMT certification exam, and many formative assessments like the NWEA MAP or iReady.  The SAT has recently transitioned to a multistage adaptive format.

How to implement CAT on an adaptive testing platform

computerized Adaptive testing options

Our revolutionary platform, FastTest, makes it easy to publish a CAT.  It is designed as a user-friendly ecosystem to build, deliver, and validate assessments, with a focus on modern psychometrics like IRT and CAT.

  1. Upload your items
  2. Deliver a pilot exam
  3. Calibrate with our IRT software Xcalibre
  4. Upload the IRT parameters into the FastTest adaptive testing platform
  5. Assemble the pool of items you want to publish
  6. Specify the adaptive testing software parameters (screenshot)
  7. Deliver your adaptive test!

 

Ready to roll?  Contact us to sign up for a free account in our industry-leading CAT platform or to discuss with one of our PhD psychometricians.

students discussing formative summative assessment

Summative and formative assessment are a crucial component of the educational process.  If you work in the educational assessment field or even in educational generally, you have probably encountered these terms.  What do they mean?  This post will explore the differences between summative and formative assessment.

Assessment plays a crucial role in education, serving as a powerful tool to gauge student understanding and guide instructional practices. Among the various assessment methods, two approaches stand out: formative assessment and summative assessment. While both types aim to evaluate student performance, they serve distinct purposes and are applied at different stages of the learning process.

 

What is Summative Assessment?

medical team certification exam

Summative assessment refers to an assessment that is at the end (sum) of an educational experience.  The “educational experience” can vary widely.  Perhaps it is a one-day training course, or even shorter.  I worked at a lumber yard in high school, and I remember getting a rudimentary training – maybe an hour – on how to use a forklift before they had me take an exam to become OSHA Certified to used a forklift.  Proctored by the guy who had just showed me the ropes, of course.  On the other end of a spectrum is board certification for a physician specialty like ophthalmology: after 4 years of undergrad, 4 years of med school, and several more years of specialty training, then you finally get to take the exam.  Either way, the purpose is to evaluate what you learned in some educational experience.

Note that it does not have to be summative at the end of formal education.  Many certifications have multiple eligibility pathways.  For example, to be eligible to sit for the exam, you might need:

  1. A bachelor’s degree.
  2. An associate degree plus 1 year of work experience.
  3. Three years of work experience.

How it is developed

Summative assessments are usually developed by assessment professionals, or a board of subject matter experts led by assessment professionals.  For example, a certification for ophthalmology is not informally developed by a teacher; there is a panel of experienced ophthalmologists led by a psychometrician.  A high school graduation exam might be developed by a panel of experienced math or English teachers, again led by a psychometrician and test developers.

The process is usually very long and time-intensive, and therefore quite expensive.  A certification will need a job analysis, item writing workshop, standard-setting study, and other important developments that contribute to the validity of the exam scores.  A high school graduation exam has expensive curriculum alignment studies and other aspects.

Implementation of Summative Assessment

Let’s explore the key aspects of summative assessment:

  1. End-of-Term Evaluation: Summative assessments are administered after the completion of a unit, semester, or academic year. They aim to evaluate the overall achievement of students and determine their readiness for advancement or graduation.
  2. Formal and Standardized: Summative assessments are often formal, standardized, and structured, ensuring consistent evaluation across different students and classrooms. Common examples include final exams, standardized tests, and grading rubrics.
  3. Accountability: Summative assessment holds students accountable for their learning outcomes and provides a comprehensive summary of their performance. It also serves as a basis for grade reporting, academic placement, and program evaluation.
  4. Future Planning: Summative assessment results can guide future instructional planning and curriculum development. They provide insights into areas of strength and weakness, helping educators identify instructional strategies and interventions to improve student outcomes.

 

What is Formative Assessment?

formative assessment in AfricaFormative assessment is something that is used during the educational process.  Everyone is familiar with this from their school days.  A quiz, an exam, or even just the teacher asking you a few questions verbally to understand your level of knowledge.  Usually, but not always, a formative assessment is used to to direct instruction.  A common example of formative assessment is low-stakes exams given in K-12 schools purely to check on student growth, without any counting towards their grades.  Some of the most widely used titles are the NWEA MAP, Renaissance Learning STAR, and Imagine Learning MyPath.

Formative assessment is a great fit for computerized adaptive testing, a method that adapts the difficulty of the exam to each student.  If a student is 3 grades behind, the test will quickly adapt down to that level, providing a better experience for the student and more accurate feedback on their level of knowledge.

How it is developed

Formative assessments are typically much more informal than summative assessments.  Most of the exams we take in our life are informally developed formative assessments; think of all the quizzes and tests you ever took during courses as a student.  Even taking a test during training on the job will often count.  However, some are developed with heavy investment, such as a nationwide K-12 adaptive testing platform.

Implementation of Formative Assessment

Formative assessment refers to the ongoing evaluation of student progress throughout the learning journey. It is designed to provide immediate feedback, identify knowledge gaps, and guide instructional decisions. Here are some key characteristics of formative assessment:

  1. Timely Feedback: Formative assessments are conducted during the learning process, allowing educators to provide immediate feedback to students. This feedback focuses on specific strengths and areas for improvement, helping students adjust their understanding and study strategies.
  2. Informal Nature: Formative assessments are typically informal and flexible, offering a wide range of techniques such as quizzes, class discussions, peer evaluations, and interactive activities. They encourage active participation and engagement, promoting deeper learning and critical thinking skills.
  3. Diagnostic Function: Formative assessment serves as a diagnostic tool, enabling teachers to monitor individual and class-wide progress. It helps identify misconceptions, adapt instructional approaches, and tailor learning experiences to meet students’ needs effectively.
  4. Growth Mindset: The primary goal of formative assessment is to foster a growth mindset among students. By focusing on improvement rather than grades, it encourages learners to embrace challenges, learn from mistakes, and persevere in their educational journey.

 

Summative vs Formative Assessment

Below you may find some principal discrepancies between summative and formative assessment across the general aspects.

Aspect Summative Assessment Formative Assessment
Purpose To evaluate overall student learning at the end of an instructional period. To monitor student learning and provide ongoing feedback for improvement.
Timing Conducted at the end of a unit, semester, or course. Conducted throughout the learning process.
Role in Learning Process To determine the extent of learning and achievement. To identify learning needs and guide instructional adjustments.
Feedback Mechanism Feedback is usually provided after the assessment is completed and is often limited to final results or scores. Provides immediate, specific, and actionable feedback to improve learning.
Nature of Evaluation Typically evaluative and judgmental, focusing on the outcome. Diagnostic and supportive, focusing on the process and improvement.
Impact on Grading Often a major component of the final grade. Generally not used for grading; intended to inform learning.
Level of Standardization Highly standardized to ensure fairness and comparability. Less standardized, often tailored to individual needs and contexts.
Frequency of Implementation Typically infrequent, such as once per term or unit. Frequent and ongoing, integrated into the daily learning activities.
Stakeholders Involved Primarily involves educators and administrative bodies for accountability purposes. Involves students, educators, and sometimes parents for immediate learning support.
Flexibility in Use Rigid in format and timing; used to meet predetermined educational benchmarks. Highly flexible; can be adapted to fit specific instructional goals and learner needs.

 

The Synergy Between Summative and Formative Assessment

While formative and summative assessments have distinct purposes, they work together in a complementary manner to enhance learning outcomes. Here are a few ways in which these assessment types can be effectively integrated:

  1. Feedback Loop: The feedback provided during formative assessments can inform and improve summative assessments. It allows students to understand their strengths and weaknesses, guiding their study efforts for better performance in the final evaluation.
  2. Continuous Improvement: By employing formative assessments throughout a course, teachers can continuously monitor student progress, identify learning gaps, and adjust instructional strategies accordingly. This iterative process can ultimately lead to improved summative assessment results.
  3. Balanced Assessment Approach: Combining both formative and summative assessments creates a more comprehensive evaluation system. It ensures that student growth and understanding are assessed both during the learning process and at the end, providing a holistic view.

 

Summative vs Formative Assessment: A Validity Perspective

So what is the difference?  You will notice it is the situation and use of the exam, not the exam itself.  You could take those K-12 feedback assessments and deliver them at the end of the year, with weighting towards the student’s final grade.  That would make them summative.  But that is not what the test was designed for.  This is the concept of validity; the evidence showing that interpretations and use of test scores are supported towards their intended use.  So the key is to design a test for its intended use, provide evidence for that use, and make sure that the exam is being used in the way that it should be.

Situational judgment tests (SJTs) are a type of assessment typically used in a pre-employment context to assess candidates’ soft skills and decision-making abilities. As the name suggests, we are not trying to assess something like knowledge, but rather the judgments or likely behaviors of candidates in specific situations, such as an unruly customer. These tests have become a critical component of modern recruitment, offering employers valuable insights into how applicants approach real-world scenarios, with higher fidelity than traditional assessments.

The importance of tools like SJTs becomes even clearer when considering the significant costs of poor hiring decisions. The U.S. Department of Labor suggests that the financial impact of a poor hiring decision can amount to roughly 30% of the employee’s annual salary. Similarly, CareerBuilder reports that around three-quarters of employers face an average loss of approximately $15,000 for each bad hire due to various costs such as training, lost productivity, and recruitment expenses. Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace Report 2022 further emphasizes the broader implications, revealing that disengaged employees—often a result of poor hiring practices—cost companies globally $8.8 trillion annually in lost productivity.

In this article, we’ll define situational judgment tests, explore their benefits, and provide an example question to better understand how they work.

What is a Situational Judgment Test?

A Situational Judgment Test (SJT) is a psychological assessment tool designed to evaluate how individuals handle hypothetical workplace scenarios. These tests present a series of realistic situations and ask candidates to choose or rank responses that best reflect how they would act. Unlike traditional aptitude tests that measure specific knowledge or technical skills, SJTs focus on soft skills like problem-solving, teamwork, communication, and adaptability. They can provide a critical amount of incremental validity over cognitive and job knowledge assessments.

SJTs are widely used in recruitment for roles where interpersonal and decision-making skills are critical, such as management, customer service, and healthcare. They can be administered in various formats, including multiple-choice questions, multiple-response items, video scenarios, or interactive simulations.

Example of a Situational Judgment Test Question

Here’s a typical SJT question to illustrate the concept:

 

Scenario:

You are leading a team project with a tight deadline. One of your team members, who is critical to the project’s success, has missed several key milestones. When you approach them, they reveal they are overwhelmed with personal issues and other work commitments.

hr-interview-pre-employment

Question:

What would you do in this situation?

– Report the issue to your manager and request their intervention.

– Offer to redistribute some of their tasks to other team members to ease their workload.

– Have a one-on-one meeting to understand their challenges and develop a plan together.

– Leave them to handle their tasks independently to avoid micromanaging.

 

Answer Key:

While there’s no definitive “right” answer in SJTs, some responses align better with desirable workplace behaviors. In this example, Option 3 demonstrates empathy, problem-solving, and leadership, which are highly valued traits in most professional settings.

 

Because SJTs typically do not have an overtly correct answer, they will sometimes have a partial credit scoring rule. In the example above, you might elect to give 2 points to Option 3 and 1 point to Option 2. Perhaps even a negative point to some options!

Potential topics for SJTs

Customer service – Given a video of an unruly customer, and how would you respond?

Difficult coworker situation – Like the previous example, how would you find a solution?

Police/Fire – It you made a routine traffic stop and the driver was acting intoxicated and belligerent, what would you do?

How to Develop and Deliver an SJT

Development of an SJT is typically more complex than knowledge-based tests, both because it is more difficult to come up with the topic/content of the item as well as plausible distractors and scoring rules. It can also get expensive if you are utilizing simulation formats or high-quality videos for which you hire real actors!

Here are some suggested steps:

  1. Define the construct you want to measure
  2. Draft item content
  3. Establish the scoring rules
  4. Have items reviewed by experts
  5. Create videos/simulations
  6. Set your cutscore (Standard setting)
  7. Publish the test

SJTs are almost always delivered by computer nowadays because it is so easy to include multimedia. Below is an example of what this will look like, using ASC’s FastTest platform.

FastTest - Situational Judgment Test SJT example

Advantages of Situational Judgment Tests

1. Realistic Assessment of Skills

Unlike theoretical tests, SJTs mimic real-world situations, making them a practical way to evaluate how candidates might behave in the workplace. This approach helps employers identify individuals who align with their organizational values and culture.

2. Focus on Soft Skills

Technical expertise can often be measured through other assessments or qualifications, but soft skills like emotional intelligence, adaptability, and teamwork are harder to gauge. SJTs provide insights into these intangible qualities that are crucial for success in many roles.

3. Reduced Bias

SJTs focus on behavior rather than background, making them a fairer assessment tool. They can help level the playing field by emphasizing practical decision-making over academic credentials or prior experience.

4. Efficient Screening Process

For roles that receive a high volume of applications, SJTs offer a quick and efficient way to filter candidates. By identifying top performers early, organizations can save time and resources in subsequent hiring stages.

5. Improved Candidate Experience

Interactive and scenario-based assessments often feel more engaging to candidates than traditional tests. This positive experience can enhance a company’s employer brand and attract top talent.

Tips for Success in Taking an SJT

If you’re preparing to take a situational judgment test, keep these tips in mind:

– Understand the Role: Research the job to better understand the types of situations that might be encountered, and think through your responses ahead of time.

– Understand the Company: Research organization to align your responses with their values, culture, and expectations.

– Prioritize Key Skills: Many SJTs assess teamwork, leadership, and conflict resolution, so focus on demonstrating these attributes.

– Practice: Familiarize yourself with sample questions to build confidence and improve your response strategy.

Conclusion

Situational judgment tests are a powerful tool for employers to evaluate candidates’ interpersonal and decision-making abilities in a realistic context, and in a way that is much more scalable than 1-on-1 interviews.  For job seekers, they offer an opportunity to showcase soft skills that might not be evident from a resume or educational record alone. As their use continues to grow across industries, understanding and preparing for SJTs can give candidates a competitive edge in the job market.

Interested developing and delivering your own SJTs on a world-class platform?  ASC’s software is designed to support such usage; contact us for a demo.

Additional Resources on SJTs

Lievens, F., & Sackett, P. R. (2012). The validity of interpersonal skills assessment via SJTs: A review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 3–17.

Weekley, J. A., & Ployhart, R. E. (Eds.). (2005). Situational judgment tests: Theory, measurement, and application. Psychology Press.

Christian, M. S., Edwards, B. D., & Bradley, J. C. (2010). Situational judgment tests: Constructs assessed and a meta-analysis of their criterion-related validity. Personnel Psychology, 63(1), 83–117.

confidence-intervals-avatar

Confidence intervals (CIs) are a fundamental concept in statistics, used extensively in assessment and measurement to estimate the reliability and precision of data. Whether in scientific research, business analytics, or health studies, confidence intervals provide a range of values that likely contain the true value of a parameter, giving us a better understanding of uncertainty. This article dives into the concept of confidence intervals, how they are used in assessments, and real-world applications to illustrate their importance.

What Is a Confidence Interval?

CI is a range of values, derived from sample data, that is likely to contain the true population parameter. Instead of providing a single estimate (like a mean or proportion), it gives a range of plausible values, often expressed with a specific level of confidence, such as 95% or 99%. For example, if a survey estimates the average height of adult males to be 175 cm with a 95% CI of 170 cm to 180 cm, it means that we can be 95% confident that the true average height of all adult males falls within this range.

These are made by taking plus or minus a standard error times a factor, around the single estimate, creating a lower bound and upper bound for a range.

Upper Bound = Estimate + factor * standard_error

Lower Bound = Estimate – factor * standard_error

The value of the factor depends upon your assumptions and the desired percentage in the range.  You might want 90%, 95%, 0r 99%.  With the standard normal distribution, the factor is 1.96 (see any table of z-scores), which makes for easy quick math of 2 in your head to get a rough idea.  So, in the example above, we might find that the average height for a sample of 100 adult males is 175 cm with a standard deviation of 25.  The standard error of the mean is SD*sqrt(N), which in this case is 25*sqrt(100) = 2.5.  If we take plus or minus 2 times the standard error of 2.5, that is how we get a confidence interval that the true population mean is 95% likely to be between 170 and 180.

This example is from general statistics, but confidence intervals are used for specific reasons in assessment.

 

How Confidence Intervals Are Used in Assessment and Measurement

calculating-confidence-interval

1. Statistical Inference

CIs play a crucial role in making inferences about a population based on sample data. For instance, researchers studying the effect of a new drug might calculate a CI for the average improvement in symptoms. This helps determine if the drug has a significant effect compared to a placebo.

2. Quality Control

In industries like manufacturing, CIs help assess product consistency and quality. For example, a factory producing light bulbs may use CIs to estimate the average lifespan of their products. This ensures that most bulbs meet performance standards.

3. Education and Testing

In educational assessments, CIs can provide insights into test reliability and student performance. For instance, a standardized test score might come with a CI to account for variability in test conditions or scoring methods.

Real-World Examples of Confidence Intervals

1. Medical Research

explaining-confidence-intervals

In clinical trials, CIs are often used to estimate the effectiveness of treatments. Suppose a study finds that a new vaccine reduces the risk of a disease by 40%, with a 95% CI of 30% to 50%. This means there’s a high probability that the true effectiveness lies within this range, helping policymakers make informed decisions.

2. Business Analytics

Businesses use CIs to forecast sales, customer satisfaction, or market trends. For example, a company surveying customer satisfaction might report an average satisfaction score of 8 out of 10, with a 95% CI of 7.5 to 8.5. This helps managers gauge customer sentiment while accounting for survey variability.

3. Environmental Studies

Environmental scientists use CIs to measure pollution levels or climate changes. For instance, if data shows that the average global temperature has increased by 1.2°C over the past century, with a CI of 0.9°C to 1.5°C, this range provides a clearer picture of the uncertainty in the estimate.

Confidence Intervals in Education: A Closer Look

CIs are particularly valuable in education, where they help assess the reliability and validity of test scores and other measurements. By understanding and applying CIs, educators, test developers, and policymakers can make more informed decisions that impact students and learning outcomes.

1. Estimating a Range for True Score

CIs are often paired with standard error of measurement (SEM) to provide insights into the reliability of test scores. SEM quantifies the amount of error expected in a score due to various factors like testing conditions or measurement tools.  It gives us a range for a true score around the observed score (see technical note near then end on this).

For example, consider a standardized test with a scaled score range of 200 to 800. If a student scores 700 with an SEM of 20, the 95% CI for their true score is calculated as:

     Score ± (SEM × Z-value for 95% confidence)

     700 ± (20 × 1.96) = 700 ± 39.2700 ± (20 × 1.96) = 700 ± 39.2

Thus, the 95% CI is approximately 660 to 740. This means we can be 95% confident that the student’s true score lies within this range, accounting for potential measurement error.  Because this is important, it is sometimes factored into important decisions such as setting a cutscore to be hired at a company based on a screening test.

The reasoning for this is accurately described by this quote from Prof. Michael Rodriguez, noted by Mohammed Abulela on LinkedIn:

A test score is a snapshot estimate, based on a sample of knowledge, skills, or dispositions, with a standard error of measurement reflecting the uncertainty in that score-because it is a sample. Fair test score interpretation employs that standard error and does not treat a score as an absolute or precise indicator of performance.

2. Using Standard Error of Estimate (SEE) for Predictions

The standard error of the estimate (SEE) is used to evaluate the accuracy of predictions in models, such as predicting student performance based on prior data.

For instance, suppose that a college readiness score ranges from 0 to 500, and is predicted by a student’s school grades and admissions test score.  If a predictive model estimates a student’s college readiness score to be 450, with an SEE of 25, the 95% confidence interval for this predicted score is:

     450 ± (25 × 1.96) = 450 ± 49

This results in a confidence interval of 401 to 499, indicating that the true readiness score is likely within this range. Such information helps educators evaluate predictive assessments and develop better intervention strategies.

3. Evaluating Group Performance

confidence-intervals-schemes

CIs are also used to assess the performance of groups, such as schools or districts. For instance, if a district’s average math score is 75 with a 95% CI of 73 to 77, policymakers can be fairly confident that the district’s true average falls within this range. This insight is crucial for making fair comparisons between schools or identifying areas that need improvement.

4. Identifying Achievement Gaps

When studying educational equity, CIs help measure differences in achievement between groups, such as socioeconomic or demographic categories. For example, if one group scores an average of 78 with a CI of 76 to 80 and another scores 72 with a CI of 70 to 74, the overlap (or lack thereof) in intervals can indicate whether the gap is statistically significant or might be due to random variability.

5. Informing Curriculum Development

CIs can guide decisions about curriculum and instructional methods. For instance, when pilot-testing a new teaching method, researchers might use CIs to evaluate its effectiveness. If students taught with the new method have scores averaging 85 with a CI of 83 to 87, compared to 80 (78 to 82) for traditional methods, educators might confidently adopt the new approach.

6. Supporting Student Growth Tracking

In long-term assessments, CIs help track student growth by providing a range around estimated progress. If a student’s reading level improves from 60 (58–62) to 68 (66–70), educators can confidently assert growth while acknowledging measurement variability.

Key Benefits of Using Confidence Intervals

  • Enhanced Decision-Making: CIs provide a range, rather than a single estimate, making decisions more robust and informed.
  • Clarity in Uncertainty: By quantifying uncertainty, confidence intervals allow stakeholders to understand the limitations of the data.
  • Improved Communication: Reporting findings with CIs ensures transparency and builds trust in the results.

 

How to Interpret Confidence Intervals

A common misconception is that a 95% CI means there’s a 95% chance the true value falls within the interval. Instead, it means that if we repeated the study many times, 95% of the calculated intervals would contain the true parameter. Thus, it’s a statement about the method, not the specific interval.  This is similar to the common misinterpretation of an experimental p-value that it is the probability that our alternative hypothesis is true; instead, it is the probability of our experiment’s results if the null is true.

Final Thoughts

CIs are indispensable in assessment and measurement, offering a clearer understanding of data variability and precision. By applying them effectively, researchers, businesses, and policymakers can make better decisions based on statistically sound insights.

Whether estimating population parameters or evaluating the reliability of a new method, CIs provide the tools to navigate uncertainty with confidence. Start using CIs today to bring clarity and precision to your analyses!

General intelligence, often symbolized as “g,” is a concept that has been central to psychology and cognitive science since the early 20th century. First introduced by Charles Spearman, general intelligence represents an individual’s overall cognitive ability. This foundational concept has evolved over the years and remains crucial in both academic and applied settings, particularly in assessment and measurement. Understanding general intelligence can help in evaluating mental abilities, predicting academic and career success, and creating reliable and valid assessment tools. This article delves into the nature of general intelligence, its assessment, and its importance in measurement fields.

What is General Intelligence?

general-intelligence-idea

General intelligence (GI), or “g,” is a theoretical construct referring to the common cognitive abilities underlying performance across various mental tasks. Spearman proposed that a general cognitive ability contributes to performance in a wide range of intellectual tasks. This ability encompasses multiple cognitive skills, such as reasoning, memory, and problem-solving, which are thought to be interconnected. In Spearman’s model, a person’s performance on any cognitive test relies partially on “g” and partially on task-specific skills.

For example, both solving complex math problems and understanding a new language involve specific abilities unique to each task but are also underpinned by an individual’s GI. This concept has been pivotal in shaping how we understand cognitive abilities and the development of intelligence tests.

To further explore the foundational aspects of intelligence, the Positive Manifold phenomenon demonstrates that most cognitive tasks tend to be positively correlated, meaning that high performance in one area generally predicts strong performance in others. You can read more about it in our article on Positive Manifold.

GI in Assessment and Measurement

The assessment of GI has been integral to psychology, education, and organizational settings for decades. Testing for “g” provides insight into an individual’s mental abilities and often serves as a predictor of various outcomes, such as academic performance, job performance, and life success.

  1. Intelligence Testing: Intelligence tests, like the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) and Stanford-Binet, aim to provide a measurement of GI. These tests typically consist of a variety of subtests measuring different cognitive skills, including verbal comprehension, working memory, and perceptual reasoning. The results are aggregated to produce an overall IQ score, representing a general measure of “g.” These scores are then compared to population averages to understand where an individual stands in terms of cognitive abilities relative to their peers.
  2. Educational Assessment: GI is often used in educational assessments to help identify students who may need additional support or advanced academic opportunities. For example, cognitive ability tests can assist in identifying gifted students who may benefit from accelerated programs or those who need extra resources. Schools also use “g” as one factor in admission processes, relying on tests like the SAT, GRE, and similar exams, which assess reasoning and problem-solving abilities linked to GI.
  3. Job and Career Assessments: Many organizations use cognitive ability tests as part of their recruitment processes. GI has been shown to predict job performance across many types of employment, especially those requiring complex decision-making and problem-solving skills. By assessing “g,” employers can gauge a candidate’s potential for learning new tasks, adapting to job challenges, and developing in their role. This approach is especially prominent in fields requiring high levels of cognitive performance, such as research, engineering, and management. One notable example is the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB), a multi-test battery that assesses candidates for military service. The ASVAB includes subtests like arithmetic reasoning, mechanical comprehension, and word knowledge, all of which reflect diverse cognitive abilities. These individual scores are then combined into the Armed Forces Qualifying Test (AFQT) score, an overall measure that serves as a proxy for GI. The AFQT score acts as a threshold across military branches, with each branch requiring minimum scores.

Here are a few ASVAB-style sample questions that reflect different cognitive areas while collectively representing general intelligence:

  1. Arithmetic Reasoning:
    If a train travels at 60 mph for 3 hours, how far does it go?
    Answer: 180 miles
  2. Word Knowledge:
    What does the word “arduous” most nearly mean?
    Answer: Difficult
  3. Mechanical Comprehension:
    If gear A turns clockwise, which direction will gear B turn if it is directly connected?
    Answer: Counterclockwise

 

How GI is Measured

studying-cognitive-abilities

In measuring GI, psychometricians use a variety of statistical techniques to ensure the reliability and validity of intelligence assessments. One common approach is factor analysis, a statistical method that identifies the relationships between variables and ensures that test items truly measure “g” as intended.

Tests designed to measure general intelligence are structured to cover a range of cognitive functions, capturing a broad spectrum of mental abilities. Each subtest score contributes to a composite score that reflects an individual’s general cognitive ability. Assessments are also periodically normed, or standardized, so that scores remain meaningful and comparable over time. This standardization process helps maintain the relevance of GI scores in diverse populations.

 

The Importance of GI in Modern Assessment

GI continues to be a critical measure for various practical and theoretical applications:

  • Predicting Success: Numerous studies have linked GI to a wide array of outcomes, from academic performance to career advancement. Because “g” encompasses the ability to learn and adapt, it is often a better predictor of success than task-specific skills alone. In fact, meta-analyses indicate that g accounts for approximately 25% of the variance in job performance, highlighting its unparalleled predictive power in educational and occupational contexts.
  • Validating Assessments: In psychometrics, GI is used to validate and calibrate assessment tools, ensuring that they measure what they intend to. Understanding “g” helps in creating reliable test batteries and composite scores, making it essential for effective educational and professional testing.
  • Advancing Cognitive Research: GI also plays a vital role in cognitive research, helping psychologists understand the nature of mental processes and the structure of human cognition. Studies on “g” contribute to theories about how people learn, adapt, and solve problems, fueling ongoing research in cognitive psychology and neuroscience.

 

The Future of GI in Assessment

With advancements in technology, the assessment of GI is becoming more sophisticated and accessible. Computerized adaptive testing (CAT) and machine learning algorithms allow for more personalized assessments, adjusting test difficulty based on real-time responses. These innovations not only improve the accuracy of GI testing but also provide a more engaging experience for test-takers.

As our understanding of human cognition expands, the concept of GI remains a cornerstone in both educational and occupational assessments. The “g” factor offers a powerful framework for understanding mental abilities and continues to be a robust predictor of various life outcomes. Whether applied in the classroom, the workplace, or in broader psychological research, GI is a valuable metric for understanding human potential and guiding personal and professional development.